Online Now 3680

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 2417
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 3666
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

247Rumors

College football scuttlebutt and scoop- powered by Football Rumor Mill

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

If Trayvon had killed Zimmerman, should he be arrested?

  • ColumbiaTider said...

    I can accurately tell you one thing....the media wouldn't have turned it into this complete white on black racial firestorm igniting black retalitory attacks all over the nation that the liberal main stream media refuses to report. Also, if Trayvon had killed Zimmerman it would have just been written up that a black teen killed a hispanic man...but since zimmerman killed trayvon it suddenly turns into a "white" man killing a black man. It's all BS the liberal media is all BS...Obama...George Soros...Eric Holder...Joe Biden...The NAACP...Jesse Jackson etc. are all nothing but racial pot stirring communist opportunists and if we don't vote these parasites out of office come November our country as a whole will enter a dark period that we have not seen before in American History. The problem with this country is that the majority of our citizens do not love America like our parents grandparents and generations before. I hate to say it but it is my generation that feels such a sense of liberal entitlement. My generation is lazy and wants to be given something for nothing. This is why I know that myself and people that believe in the same values that I do will be succesful because we believe in the value of hard work to get ahead in the country. God Bless America. If you want change make chance vote in November. God Bless.

    Very odd rant that doesn't concern this thread.

    ReasonableDoubt ●

  • ReasonableDoubt said...

    Maybe alan d, like everyone else, wants hiss time in the spotlight. The actual law isnt that complicated. Did you read it and get the same conclusion?

    No AD said that he just had to feel that his life was threatened and regular self-defense applies, not SYG. This is why there is about a 0.001% chance of convicting GZ of murder 2. The prosecutor has already admitted that there is no real evidence to shows that GZ started the fight (according the the AD article). Adding it up, I may have been a bit too generous, but I had to account for a jury fool of emotional nuts.

    signature image

    menichols74

  • This is AD's stance:
    " Now there is much more extensive medical evidence that would tend to support Zimmerman’s version of events. This version, if true, would establish self-defense even if Zimmerman had improperly followed, harassed and provoked Martin.

    A defendant, under Florida law, loses his “stand your ground” defense if he provoked the encounter —but he retains traditional self-defense if he reasonably believed his life was in danger and his only recourse was to employ deadly force."

    AD is using 776.041.2a of syg to say that charges should be dropped. But if you read that statute, it clearly says AND the initial aggressor must exhaust every effort to escape our retreat.

    So hes reading half of a sentence and using it to anger a certain base. But surely since hes a lawyer hes completely honest in his endeavors....smh

    I'm suprised that so many people suddenly think oj's lawyer would be above doing something for publicity. Read the law yourself and tell me I'm wrong. I can respect that better than claiming AD as a reliable source.

    ReasonableDoubt ●

  • bhiley77 said...

    The simple and most logical conclusion to draw would be that one of the most brilliant legal minds of our age is better at interpreting the law then random dudes on message boards.

    Read it yourself and tell me went I'm wrong.

    ReasonableDoubt ●

  • gobigblue21 said...

    Literally my entire point right there.

    Black guy kills seemingly innocent white kid and no one bats an eye, they call him guilty and say send him to jail... you know the right thing to do.

    Instead it's the other way around and you progressivists have been arguing back and forth because you put yourself in the shoes of George Zimmerman and share the same fear of young black men invading your neighborhoods.

    Hide ya kids, hide ya wife.

    I think you missed my point.

    Assuming the neighborhood in question is a black neighborhood, no white kid is dumb enough to walk through it.

    Oh, I also forgot...Zimmerman is not white. He's as white as Obama, at least.

    This post was edited by PSU42Fan on 5/25/2012 at 5:20 AM

    F the NCAA F the BOT F ESPN F Sandusky

    PSU42Fan

  • ReasonableDoubt said...

    This is AD's stance: " Now there is much more extensive medical evidence that would tend to support Zimmerman’s version of events. This version, if true, would establish self-defense even if Zimmerman had improperly followed, harassed and provoked Martin.

    A defendant, under Florida law, loses his “stand your ground” defense if he provoked the encounter —but he retains traditional self-defense if he reasonably believed his life was in danger and his only recourse was to employ deadly force."

    AD is using 776.041.2a of syg to say that charges should be dropped. But if you read that statute, it clearly says AND the initial aggressor must exhaust every effort to escape our retreat.

    So hes reading half of a sentence and using it to anger a certain base. But surely since hes a lawyer hes completely honest in his endeavors....smh

    I'm suprised that so many people suddenly think oj's lawyer would be above doing something for publicity. Read the law yourself and tell me I'm wrong. I can respect that better than claiming AD as a reliable source.

    You just typed the very reason the charges should be dropped (or lowered to manslaughter). AD is saying that even if GZ is deemed as the aggressor, his right of traditional self defense (not SYG) still applies. AD gives an example, if GZ verbally provokes TM, TM ends up beating GZ as reported, GZ still has the right to shoot TM. It is also stated in that article that the prosecution has admitted that they do not have any evidence that GZ started the fight (I don't know if they mean physically or otherwise).

    Bottom line, SYG law is NOT NEEDED and is IRRELEVANT in AD's claim as to why the charges should be dropped against GZ.

    Now, if there evidence (not supposition) that GZ was the aggressor. Maybe the DA could try for manslaughter, but as stated by AD and as understood with anyone looking at the whole picture, there are NO GROUNDS FOR A MURDER CHARGE IN THIS CASE (based on evidence released at this time). Why did the DA decided to press charges without going to grand jury?

    The only discussion room here is should the charges be dropped totally or reduced to manslaughter. If there is evidence that GZ was the aggressor (SYG may not apply if they deem he didn't do enough to defuse the situation, but traditional self-defense still applies), then the DA could say that started the situation that lead the the death of Martin.

    This really isn't hard.

    signature image

    menichols74

  • menichols74 said...

    You just typed the very reason the charges should be dropped (or lowered to manslaughter). AD is saying that even if GZ is deemed as the aggressor, his right of traditional self defense (not SYG) still applies. AD gives an example, if GZ verbally provokes TM, TM ends up beating GZ as reported, GZ still has the right to shoot TM. It is also stated in that article that the prosecution has admitted that they do not have any evidence that GZ started the fight (I don't know if they mean physically or otherwise).

    Bottom line, SYG law is NOT NEEDED and is IRRELEVANT in AD's claim as to why the charges should be dropped against GZ.

    Now, if there evidence (not supposition) that GZ was the aggressor. Maybe the DA could try for manslaughter, but as stated by AD and as understood with anyone looking at the whole picture, there are NO GROUNDS FOR A MURDER CHARGE IN THIS CASE (based on evidence released at this time). Why did the DA decided to press charges without going to grand jury?

    The only discussion room here is should the charges be dropped totally or reduced to manslaughter. If there is evidence that GZ was the aggressor (SYG may not apply if they deem he didn't do enough to defuse the situation, but traditional self-defense still applies), then the DA could say that started the situation that lead the the death of Martin.

    This really isn't hard.

    I see what you're saying. I misunderstood what he meant by using a traditional defense......

    However, traditional self defense is described in 776.012, 776.013, 776.031, 776.032.

    BUT HERE IS THE PROBLEM WITH THAT. These are the first words of 776.041:

    "776.041 Use of force by aggressor.— THE JUSTIFICATION DESCRIBED IN THE PRECEDING SECTIONS OF THIS CHAPTER IS NOT AVAILABLE TO A PERSON WHO:"

    And it goes on to explain the initial aggessor stuff that we've talked about. So if you're seen as the initial aggressor, traditional self defense claim is superceeded by 776.041.

    This post was edited by ReasonableDoubt on 5/25/2012 at 10:49 AM

    ReasonableDoubt ●

  • It may be most accurate to state that traditional defense is blended in with SYG. But it's a complete logical failure to say that anyone can be the initial aggressor and then lawfully kill the other person for winning the fight.

    ReasonableDoubt ●

  • And fwiw when I say initial aggressor, it earlier defines that term as a person who "Initially provokes the use of force against himself". This is the sole goal in starting the thread, to get opinions on wether or not Zimmerman provokes the use of force agaisnt himself.

    And, if Zimmerman did provoke the situation, did he satisfy the requirement of retreat to claim SYG?

    And I'm pretty sure AD know all of this. But i guess everyone can get their 15 minutes off of this case.

    ReasonableDoubt ●

  • ReasonableDoubt said...

    I see what you're saying. I misunderstood what he meant by using a traditional defense......

    However, traditional self defense is described in 776.012, 776.013, 776.031, 776.032.

    BUT HERE IS THE PROBLEM WITH THAT. These are the first words of 776.041:

    "776.041 Use of force by aggressor.— THE JUSTIFICATION DESCRIBED IN THE PRECEDING SECTIONS OF THIS CHAPTER IS NOT AVAILABLE TO A PERSON WHO:"

    And it goes on to explain the initial aggessor stuff that we've talked about. So if you're seen as the initial aggressor, traditional self defense claim is superceeded by 776.041.

    I had this in my head, but failed to type it... GZ could be the initial aggressor (verbally) that caused the situation and didn't do enough to retreat, thus potentially losing SYG. That is a moot point b/c traditional SD still applies (assuming GZ didn't physically start the fight). This is the point that AD was trying to make and is pretty darn simple and air tight. Unless there is evidence that GZ threw the first punch or pulled the gun and threatened to shoot TM, a murder conviction isn't/ain't going to happen and is completely unjustified and a waste of tax-payer money.

    Maybe manslaughter, but that is a much muddier pool to wade into here.

    signature image

    menichols74

  • menichols74 said...

    I had this in my head, but failed to type it... GZ could be the initial aggressor (verbally) that caused the situation and didn't do enough to retreat, thus potentially losing SYG. That is a moot point b/c traditional SD still applies (assuming GZ didn't physically start the fight). This is the point that AD was trying to make and is pretty darn simple and air tight. Unless there is evidence that GZ threw the first punch or pulled the gun and threatened to shoot TM, a murder conviction isn't/ain't going to happen and is completely unjustified and a waste of tax-payer money.

    Maybe manslaughter, but that is a much muddier pool to wade into here.

    The post that u quoted shows that a traditional defense is also not available to the initial aggressor.

    If he is the initial aggressor, his only option is to use 776.041.

    ReasonableDoubt ●

  • ReasonableDoubt said...

    The post that u quoted shows that a traditional defense is also not available to the initial aggressor.

    If he is the initial aggressor, his only option is to use 776.041.

    Yes, but following AD's example leads me to believe that you would have to show that GZ struck or attempted to strike TM to label him as the initial aggressor under the traditional self-defense law (which the DA even admitted there was no evidence for - per same article). Thus, traditional self defense still applies even if the DA could show GZ was the initial aggressor via verbal means under SYG.

    Look, I get the AD is a publicity hound, but I don't think that changes the logic. Geraldo Rivera and many other high profile attorneys have said the same thing as AD. There may be a case for manslaughter if the DA can prove that SYG does not apply, but without a miracle witness or videotape to show that GZ physically started the fight, a murder 2 conviction is not going to happen and the charges are really a waste of time and money.

    signature image

    menichols74

  • menichols74 said...

    Yes, but following AD's example leads me to believe that you would have to show that GZ struck or attempted to strike TM to label him as the initial aggressor under the traditional self-defense law (which the DA even admitted there was no evidence for - per same article). Thus, traditional self defense still applies even if the DA could show GZ was the initial aggressor via verbal means under SYG.

    Look, I get the AD is a publicity hound, but I don't think that changes the logic. Geraldo Rivera and many other high profile attorneys have said the same thing as AD. There may be a case for manslaughter if the DA can prove that SYG does not apply, but without a miracle witness or videotape to show that GZ physically started the fight, a murder 2 conviction is not going to happen and the charges are really a waste of time and money.

    Your first paragraph is the reason I started the thread, to get opinions on what would zimmerman would have to do to become the initial aggressor. If you combine the entire situation of following and arguing with martin and if martin saw the gun, it's very real to say that zimmerman put himself in a situation to for someone to bring violence upon him.

    AD chopped the law up to get attention. He worked on the assumption that the da could show that hes the initial aggressor but he should get away bc his life was in danger.....yet that is completely false.

    As the statute clearly shows, if gz is the initial aggressor the rest of the statute takes a backseat to 776.041

    ReasonableDoubt ●

  • A few points:

    If zimmerman actually struck first hes committing a crime and can't claim syg anyway. Killing someone during the commission of a crime is textbook murder 2.

    It doesn't seem like the da can prove that from the info we've seen.

    So only thing left is the initial aggressor. How is that defined? It seems that it's less than zimmerman striking first because that would fall under the aforementioned case of committing a crime and being murder 2.
    The statute specifically mentions provoking the use of force against yourself. So the jury sees gz as provoking force against himself out could go badly.

    However, I would still prefer a man 1 charge.

    ReasonableDoubt ●

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports